Re: [DNSOP] Introducing draft-vavrusa-dnsop-aaaa-for-free

[Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Marek Vavruša wrote:

>       What happens with the Answer Count for QTYPE=A when there are no A
>       records and only AAAA records? And can the examples also clarify this?
> 
> That's an example 5.3

The use case is, but I still have no idea what the ANCOUNT should
be. Neither the text nor the example list the ANCOUNT. I can only assume
based on the fact that the AAAA is placed in the answer section, that
you would have ANCOUNT=1. I think that is wrong. I think ANCOUNT should
be 0, and the AAAA record should be in the additional section.

> The proposal is opt-in, if the authoritative decides to throw in AAAA addresses
> then client should accept them. If it doesn't then it should requery. This is of course
> going to reduce the effectiveness in the transition period for names that have A, but don't have AAAA
> which is something I expect to change.

And I would assume QTYPE=AAAA with additional A records would become the
more common query. At least I hope we are still trying to transition to
IPv6 :)

> The rationale is not to carry unnecessary payload when most authoritatives support it, but you make a good point
> that it might be better to mandate denial of non-existence proof now, and amend the draft later.

If you want to do it your way, you need to add some signalling so the
client knows what happened and it can decide whether or not to query
again. I think it is important for the client to know whether the
answer that came back came from a server supporting this document,
as opposed to a server not supporting this document.

>       What is SNAME? Did you mean QNAME?
>  
> SNAME as in RFC1034, either QNAME or CNAME chain terminal name.

Oh thanks. a quick google didnt give me much :)

Paul